The Rules of Type Four

[Smmenen]

Recently there has been some debate on my team forums about the inadequacy of both the "house" type four infinite loop rule as well as the comprehensive rules infinite loop rule.   To overcome this difficulty, I've developed a simple rule that effectively solves most, if not all, of these problems.

So here are the first two rules:

1) Players have infinite mana.

2) Players may only play one spell per turn.

And here it is, the Third Rule of Type Four:

3) Whenever a player passes priority after targeting an object with an activated ability, that player may not target that object with the same activated ability until the stack clears. 

Thoughts?

[Anusien]

Interesting.  I guess I don't play enough T4, because I don't immediately see the point.

[Mr. Nightmare]

Interesting.  I guess I don't play enough T4, because I don't immediately see the point.

It's goal is to cover things like infinitely stealing a Masticore with Memnarch. 
(P1:  Steal Core.
P2:  Kill Mem, kill Core.
P1:  With last activation stacked, steal Core.
P2:  Kill Mem, kill Core.
etc.)

Edit - I think it's a fairly elegant way to solve a rather unique problem the format suffers from.

[jro]

3) Whenever a player passes priority after targeting a permanent in play with an activated ability, that player may not target the same permanent with that activated ability until the stack clears.

I don't think there are any interactions as of yet where this would matter, but should it be "any object" instead of "a permanent in play"?

Also, is there any way to generalize this for non-targeted abilities?  For instance, Silklash Spider vs Rainbow Efreet?  I kind of think that if there's going to be non-standard rules for handling infinite loops, they should cover as many cases as possible.  It wouldn't make much sense if Flowstone Overseer could never kill Rainbow Efreet, while Silklash Spider could, but only on the Efreet's controller's turn (which is what the official rules would say).  The official rules are kind of baffling, but at least they're consistently baffling.

[Smmenen]

Actually, I have revised the rule to read any "object."  I'm a little mystified why the rule I copied and pasted didn't have that wording.   

It should read:

Whenever a player passes priority after targeting an object with an activated ability, that player may not target that object again with the same activated ability until the stack clears.

You are right - I don't know how to generalize this to non-targeted abilities except to re-interpret those abilities into lots of mini-targeted effects. 

[Matt]

You could just make a rule: in the case of infinite loops consisting of one or more voluntary actions, the least-active player (player who has spent the most number of turns since they were the active player) involved in the loop wins.

Also, you forgot the "no mana burn" corollary to rule #1, or is that a separate rule?

[oneofchaos]

Also what do you plan on doing for things such as bringers, morphs, suspend, etc.  Will there finally be a rule that says (these types of cards and list all relevant) are not counted as your spell per turn?  Or should they remain house rules?

[Matt]

Why would any of those not count as playing a spell?

[Anusien]

Why would any of those not count as playing a spell?

Cards with ACC generally don't.  Bringers never made sense to me, but morph and suspend do.

[Matt]

Why would any of those not count as playing a spell?

Cards with ACC generally don't.  Bringers never made sense to me, but morph and suspend do.

So like, Shoals wouldn't count? Wtf?

[Jacob Orlove]

The only cards in my T4 stacks that do not count as your spell for the turn are the lands. I think it's worth leaving that up to houserules, because every stack is different.

[Smmenen]

The principle we've always used is that cards in which there is an "alternative" cost that actually costs you something *other* than mana, then those are the cards that don't count to your spell for the turn.   

But cards that merely have an alternative mana cost count as a spell for the turn regardless of which way they are played.

This accords with the principle that led us to make ACC spells not count in the first place.   ACC is another way to pay for a spell to get around the fundamental contraint of magic: mana.   Since T4 doesn't have a mana constraint, the ACC should be used to get around the key constraint: spells per turn.   Cards like Bringer or Morphs that merely have alternative mana costs don't fit that principle.

[oneofchaos]

I've never liked having bringers as free, morphs are free/will always be free in my house. I think right now, my only "free" spells are force of will type things, suspend, morph and lands.  I considered evoke, but it's just paying half or so of the creatures cost, to get the CIPA, which is a lame free spell per turn.  I still am a proponent morphs should be free, since it's fitting you can morph/play creature pass, and unmorph, or you can defend your morph with counterspells.  Since day 1, I've been playing like that, so I'm not changing that up.

[Nefarias]

Heh, I guess I'm the only one that uses Bringers. Yet, I don't use Morph.

I don't really understand Morph, or how you can allow Morph but not a lot of other things. I feel like allowing Morph for free would kinda be like allowing cards with Kicker for free as long as you don't pay the kicker or something. I just don't understand the ideaology behind it at all. Morphs are much, much better than say, an Evoked creature or something, making them better is unnecessary. Cards like Voidmage Prodigy and Mischeivous Quanar are already amongst the best cards in the stack, and Voidmage Apprentice, Vesuvan Shapeshifter, and Willbender aren't to shabby either. I'm not saying that making them too good is any reason not to make it APC if it is justifiable, just mentioning that it is not a justification to make it so.

The rule that I've always used is trying to make it as literal as possible, and make it free of any interpretational grey area. The current wording on cards such as Force of Will and Misdirection use the phrase "rather than pay" to describe the action of paying an APC. So, anything that uses that phrase counts as a free spell in my book. This includes the Bringers.

I agree that APC should remain house rule, not that anything that anyone says in here is going to make anyone change their house rules.

[Mr. Nightmare]

Man, I let everything be free.  Force of Wills (and things like Foil which have been modded to work), Bringers, Morphs, Suspend, FLASHBACK, it's all free.  Games are crazier when people can play lots of stuff.  Plus, having Force backup is awesome.

[Mr. Type 4]

I really like ACC cards being free.  I don't do it for Bringers, but I don't see a big problem with them being run that way, I just don't feel it's necessary to make those cards better

Having FOW allows you a little flexibility to be able to play a card with less risk that you get blown up after playing it because you already played your spell.  It adds a nice dimension to the game.